Each November, California residents are asked to become experts on complex issues such as economics, climate change and affordable housing in a matter of months. Even as a lifelong Californian, I understand that asking the average citizen to devote copious amounts of time to truly informing themselves on high-stakes state propositions is a tall order. Still, doing so is not only our right, but a part of our duty to ensure a more equitable future for all California residents.

Not to mention, we are one of only 26 states that have some form of initiative process and/or referendum process — otherwise known as opportunities for citizens to be involved in the state democracy by proposing new laws or amendments. Since 1912, California residents have decided the fate of 1,291 propositions, and after several last-minute changes, 10 propositions have made it onto this year’s ballot — including a contentious public school funding proposal.

Daily headlines, sent straight to your inbox.

Subscribe to our newsletter to keep up with the latest at and around USC.

What is Proposition 2?

Proposition 2 would allow the state to borrow $10 billion to fund infrastructure repairs and renovations for thousands of public schools and community colleges across California. Following a difficult rejection of the last proposed school bond in March 2020, legislators have lowered the price tag from $15 billion to $10 billion in hopes of securing the desperately needed school funds. By January 2025, the money given to the state’s school repair fund from the last successful school bond proposal in 2016 will be completely gone. 

Proposition 2 is backed by numerous school districts, including the massive Los Angeles Unified School District, in addition to support from the Association of California School Administrators, the Coalition for Adequate School Housing, California Federation of Teachers, California School Boards Association and the State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond. Supporters say many schools are in haggard conditions, and this bond could lead to scientifically-backed improvements in learning conditions.

The Breakdown of Funds

It is estimated that $3.4 billion of the funds will go to the existing waitlist of school districts seeking to deal with necessary repairs such as mold, septic systems and building damages as well as renovating and replacing old structures.

The bond reserves $8.5 billion for renovations and the construction of new facilities, with 10% of these funds being reserved specifically for smaller school districts. Additionally, California community colleges would receive an estimated $1.5 billion piece of the pie.

How School Districts Will Qualify

School districts must first raise their own bond and then apply to the State Facilities Program to receive a “match” on their fundraising for up to 65% for renovation costs and 55% for expenses on new construction. Exact matches are calculated using a formula which offers higher matches for low-wealth districts and lower matches for more affluent districts. Furthermore, districts that are ultimately unable to raise more than $15 million will qualify for a 100% match — both new and admirable attempts to make this proposal as equitable as possible.

What Critics Say

However, low-wealth districts and other advocates criticize the proposal for its fundraising component; they argue that the State Facilities Program “matching” the amount of funds raised by schools greatly limits the amount of funding disadvantaged schools can receive — only exacerbating the equity gap between underfunded and affluent school districts. The nonprofit law firm Public Advocates has threatened to sue on this matter if it passes.

Additionally, critics raise the issue of increasing California’s existing debt of $78 billion by $18 billion after interest and claim that Proposition 2 ignores the guaranteed 40% of the state’s budget slotted for public education on top of the proposed bond.

The Bottom Line

All of the above are legitimate concerns, but California schools have gone without any new state bond funding since 2016 — and it shows; as a former public school student, the conditions of our schools are severely sub-standard, with districts begging for help in addressing mold growth, deteriorating buildings and more. 

It’s true that a good part of California’s state budget goes to public school funding, but the cost of maintaining public schools at even a minimum degree is invariably going up — and we need to keep up. With 42% of USC’s incoming 2023 class hailing from California alone, public schools have undeniably shouldered the brunt of our personal and academic growth.

Ultimately, the decision rests on each individual, but many of us owe our education and subsequent success to California public schools, and voting in the November polls is the time to show up and pay them back in a small way.